Vertical spacing in cells

Discussion in 'HTML' started by Robert, Jan 31, 2010.

  1. Robert

    Robert Guest

    in a table cell (which contains the whole the right side menu /
    context bar of a page) I want to put one element/section/paragraph
    aligned on the bottom of that cell, while all the rest shall is
    flowing from the top of the cell.
    What is a good method for that? some infinite, automatic vspacer
    or so?

    I'm only aware of possibly realizing the neighbor cells of the
    outer table with rowspan=2 and thus maybe haven 2 cells for that
    right bar area. the lower one with valign=bottom. But that seems
    complicated and odd...


    Robert
     
    Robert, Jan 31, 2010
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Robert wrote:

    > in a table cell (which contains the whole the right side menu /
    > context bar of a page)


    (gets popcorn... waits...)

    --
    -bts
     
    Beauregard T. Shagnasty, Jan 31, 2010
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
    > Robert wrote:
    >
    >> in a table cell (which contains the whole the right side menu /
    >> context bar of a page)

    >
    > (gets popcorn... waits...)
    >


    Too subtle, you may be eating a lot of popcorn.

    --
    Take care,

    Jonathan
    -------------------
    LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
    http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
     
    Jonathan N. Little, Jan 31, 2010
    #3
  4. Robert

    dorayme Guest

    In article <hk4ap7$6de$>,
    Robert <> wrote:

    > in a table cell (which contains the whole the right side menu /
    > context bar of a page) I want to put one element/section/paragraph
    > aligned on the bottom of that cell, while all the rest shall is
    > flowing from the top of the cell.
    > What is a good method for that? some infinite, automatic vspacer
    > or so?
    >
    > I'm only aware of possibly realizing the neighbor cells of the
    > outer table with rowspan=2 and thus maybe haven 2 cells for that
    > right bar area. the lower one with valign=bottom. But that seems
    > complicated and odd...
    >
    >

    If you are going to use tables for layout, it would be odd not to
    have the stomach for the perfectly normal uncomplicated use of
    rowspan.

    --
    dorayme
     
    dorayme, Jan 31, 2010
    #4
  5. Robert

    Bob Guest

    dorayme wrote:
    > In article <hk4ap7$6de$>,
    > Robert <> wrote:
    >
    >> in a table cell (which contains the whole the right side menu /
    >> context bar of a page) I want to put one element/section/paragraph
    >> aligned on the bottom of that cell, while all the rest shall is
    >> flowing from the top of the cell.
    >> What is a good method for that? some infinite, automatic vspacer
    >> or so?
    >>
    >> I'm only aware of possibly realizing the neighbor cells of the
    >> outer table with rowspan=2 and thus maybe haven 2 cells for that
    >> right bar area. the lower one with valign=bottom. But that seems
    >> complicated and odd...
    >>
    >>

    > If you are going to use tables for layout, it would be odd not to
    > have the stomach for the perfectly normal uncomplicated use of
    > rowspan.


    Embedding a further borderless 2-row 1-column table inside this cell
    would be easier since it would avoid the "complication" of having to
    apply the rowspan=2 to all the other content outside of this cell.
     
    Bob, Jan 31, 2010
    #5
  6. Robert

    dorayme Guest

    In article <4b65e9cc$0$2492$>,
    Bob <> wrote:

    > dorayme wrote:
    > > In article <hk4ap7$6de$>,
    > > Robert <> wrote:
    > >
    > >> in a table cell (which contains the whole the right side menu /
    > >> context bar of a page) I want to put one element/section/paragraph
    > >> aligned on the bottom of that cell, while all the rest shall is
    > >> flowing from the top of the cell.
    > >> What is a good method for that? some infinite, automatic vspacer
    > >> or so?
    > >>
    > >> I'm only aware of possibly realizing the neighbor cells of the
    > >> outer table with rowspan=2 and thus maybe haven 2 cells for that
    > >> right bar area. the lower one with valign=bottom. But that seems
    > >> complicated and odd...
    > >>
    > >>

    > > If you are going to use tables for layout, it would be odd not to
    > > have the stomach for the perfectly normal uncomplicated use of
    > > rowspan.

    >
    > Embedding a further borderless 2-row 1-column table inside this cell
    > would be easier since it would avoid the "complication" of having to
    > apply the rowspan=2 to all the other content outside of this cell.


    Why is applying a simple rowspan more complicated than "embedding
    yet another table"? It is more complex markup for a start: more
    elements (another TABLE, TR, TD...). What is driving you to say
    these things? Is there a little something or three that you are
    not telling us? How about a URL of your best shot that shows what
    realistic thing you are trying to do on the page in question?

    --
    dorayme
     
    dorayme, Jan 31, 2010
    #6
  7. Robert

    Bob Guest

    dorayme wrote:
    > In article <4b65e9cc$0$2492$>,
    > Bob <> wrote:
    >
    >> dorayme wrote:
    >>> In article <hk4ap7$6de$>,
    >>> Robert <> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> in a table cell (which contains the whole the right side menu /
    >>>> context bar of a page) I want to put one element/section/paragraph
    >>>> aligned on the bottom of that cell, while all the rest shall is
    >>>> flowing from the top of the cell.
    >>>> What is a good method for that? some infinite, automatic vspacer
    >>>> or so?
    >>>>
    >>>> I'm only aware of possibly realizing the neighbor cells of the
    >>>> outer table with rowspan=2 and thus maybe haven 2 cells for that
    >>>> right bar area. the lower one with valign=bottom. But that seems
    >>>> complicated and odd...
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>> If you are going to use tables for layout, it would be odd not to
    >>> have the stomach for the perfectly normal uncomplicated use of
    >>> rowspan.

    >> Embedding a further borderless 2-row 1-column table inside this cell
    >> would be easier since it would avoid the "complication" of having to
    >> apply the rowspan=2 to all the other content outside of this cell.

    >
    > Why is applying a simple rowspan more complicated than "embedding
    > yet another table"? It is more complex markup for a start: more
    > elements (another TABLE, TR, TD...). What is driving you to say
    > these things? Is there a little something or three that you are
    > not telling us? How about a URL of your best shot that shows what
    > realistic thing you are trying to do on the page in question?


    Calm down.

    Having the additional table within the cell in question means that the
    changes needed to achieve what the OP desires is self-contained within
    that very cell. Having to rowspan everything else is going to be higher
    maintenance.
     
    Bob, Jan 31, 2010
    #7
  8. Robert

    dorayme Guest

    In article <4b65f41d$0$2522$>,
    Bob <> wrote:

    > dorayme wrote:
    > > In article <4b65e9cc$0$2492$>,
    > > Bob <> wrote:
    > >
    > >> dorayme wrote:
    > >>> In article <hk4ap7$6de$>,
    > >>> Robert <> wrote:
    > >>>
    > >>>> in a table cell (which contains the whole the right side menu /
    > >>>> context bar of a page) I want to put one element/section/paragraph
    > >>>> aligned on the bottom of that cell, while all the rest shall is
    > >>>> flowing from the top of the cell.
    > >>>> What is a good method for that? some infinite, automatic vspacer
    > >>>> or so?
    > >>>>
    > >>>> I'm only aware of possibly realizing the neighbor cells of the
    > >>>> outer table with rowspan=2 and thus maybe haven 2 cells for that
    > >>>> right bar area. the lower one with valign=bottom. But that seems
    > >>>> complicated and odd...
    > >>>>
    > >>>>
    > >>> If you are going to use tables for layout, it would be odd not to
    > >>> have the stomach for the perfectly normal uncomplicated use of
    > >>> rowspan.
    > >> Embedding a further borderless 2-row 1-column table inside this cell
    > >> would be easier since it would avoid the "complication" of having to
    > >> apply the rowspan=2 to all the other content outside of this cell.

    > >
    > > Why is applying a simple rowspan more complicated than "embedding
    > > yet another table"? It is more complex markup for a start: more
    > > elements (another TABLE, TR, TD...). What is driving you to say
    > > these things? Is there a little something or three that you are
    > > not telling us? How about a URL of your best shot that shows what
    > > realistic thing you are trying to do on the page in question?

    >
    > Calm down.
    >
    > Having the additional table within the cell in question means that the
    > changes needed to achieve what the OP desires is self-contained within
    > that very cell. Having to rowspan everything else is going to be higher
    > maintenance.



    What *else* is there to rowspan? There are things you are not
    telling us then, so maybe you should be less calm and spill the
    whole beans! <g>

    --
    dorayme
     
    dorayme, Jan 31, 2010
    #8
  9. Robert

    Robert Guest

    Bob wrote:
    > dorayme wrote:
    >> In article <4b65e9cc$0$2492$>,
    >> Bob <> wrote:
    >>
    >>> dorayme wrote:
    >>>> In article <hk4ap7$6de$>,
    >>>> Robert <> wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> in a table cell (which contains the whole the right side menu /
    >>>>> context bar of a page) I want to put one element/section/paragraph
    >>>>> aligned on the bottom of that cell, while all the rest shall is
    >>>>> flowing from the top of the cell.
    >>>>> What is a good method for that? some infinite, automatic vspacer or
    >>>>> so?
    >>>>>
    >>>>> I'm only aware of possibly realizing the neighbor cells of the
    >>>>> outer table with rowspan=2 and thus maybe haven 2 cells for that
    >>>>> right bar area. the lower one with valign=bottom. But that seems
    >>>>> complicated and odd...
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>> If you are going to use tables for layout, it would be odd not to
    >>>> have the stomach for the perfectly normal uncomplicated use of rowspan.
    >>> Embedding a further borderless 2-row 1-column table inside this cell
    >>> would be easier since it would avoid the "complication" of having to
    >>> apply the rowspan=2 to all the other content outside of this cell.

    >>
    >> Why is applying a simple rowspan more complicated than "embedding yet
    >> another table"? It is more complex markup for a start: more elements
    >> (another TABLE, TR, TD...). What is driving you to say these things?
    >> Is there a little something or three that you are not telling us? How
    >> about a URL of your best shot that shows what realistic thing you are
    >> trying to do on the page in question?

    >
    > Calm down.
    >
    > Having the additional table within the cell in question means that the
    > changes needed to achieve what the OP desires is self-contained within
    > that very cell. Having to rowspan everything else is going to be higher
    > maintenance.


    that'd be true: a local solution. I tried this, but didn't get
    that embedded 2-row table in that cell to vertically expand to the
    cell height. how to?

    Robert
     
    Robert, Feb 1, 2010
    #9
  10. Robert

    dorayme Guest

    In article <hk7aof$7p7$>,
    Robert <> wrote:

    > > Having the additional table within the cell in question means that the
    > > changes needed to achieve what the OP desires is self-contained within
    > > that very cell. Having to rowspan everything else is going to be higher
    > > maintenance.

    >
    > that'd be true: a local solution. I tried this, but didn't get
    > that embedded 2-row table in that cell to vertically expand to the
    > cell height. how to?
    >

    After you finish dribbling bits of information here, someone will
    come along and give you a hand. Give a URL of this last attempt
    of yours (don't bother with the far simpler mere rowspan, that is
    for some reason that still remains obscure, unacceptable to you.)

    --
    dorayme
     
    dorayme, Feb 1, 2010
    #10
  11. Robert

    Robert Guest

    dorayme wrote:
    > In article <hk4ap7$6de$>,
    > Robert <> wrote:
    >
    >> in a table cell (which contains the whole the right side menu /
    >> context bar of a page) I want to put one element/section/paragraph
    >> aligned on the bottom of that cell, while all the rest shall is
    >> flowing from the top of the cell.
    >> What is a good method for that? some infinite, automatic vspacer
    >> or so?
    >>
    >> I'm only aware of possibly realizing the neighbor cells of the
    >> outer table with rowspan=2 and thus maybe haven 2 cells for that
    >> right bar area. the lower one with valign=bottom. But that seems
    >> complicated and odd...
    >>
    >>

    > If you are going to use tables for layout, it would be odd not to


    how can make this vertical positionion "at the right bottom of a
    certain area" with other means than tables? a simple example?


    > have the stomach for the perfectly normal uncomplicated use of
    > rowspan.


    (the other cells need all to have correct spans - I often ended in
    ill tables when doing so. and just for the purpose of this need of
    local positioning of an element which has nothing to do with the
    greater table layout ..-.)

    Robert
     
    Robert, Feb 1, 2010
    #11
  12. Robert

    dorayme Guest

    In article <hk7fgu$g6c$>,
    Robert <> wrote:

    > how can make this vertical positionion "at the right bottom of a
    > certain area" with other means than tables? a simple example?


    Why should we go down that road when I have not a clue what you
    are really doing. I am not complaining about your use of tables.
    Go ahead and use tables. But you seem unwilling to give a URL
    that gives an idea of what you want, and you reject rowspan for
    some obscure reason.

    --
    dorayme
     
    dorayme, Feb 1, 2010
    #12
  13. Robert

    Robert Guest

    dorayme wrote:
    > In article <hk7fgu$g6c$>,
    > Robert <> wrote:
    >
    >> how can make this vertical positionion "at the right bottom of a
    >> certain area" with other means than tables? a simple example?

    >
    > Why should we go down that road when I have not a clue what you
    > are really doing. I am not complaining about your use of tables.
    > Go ahead and use tables. But you seem unwilling to give a URL
    > that gives an idea of what you want, and you reject rowspan for
    > some obscure reason.
    >


    see not other solution than rowspan. didn't the that embedded
    table to extend to full vertical extent.

    a google keyword hint or so regarding the other option(s) would be
    enough. typically I find way upon that. no big road necessary.


    Robert
     
    Robert, Feb 2, 2010
    #13
  14. Robert wrote:
    > dorayme wrote:
    >> In article <hk7fgu$g6c$>,
    >> Robert <> wrote:
    >>
    >>> how can make this vertical positionion "at the right bottom of a
    >>> certain area" with other means than tables? a simple example?

    >>
    >> Why should we go down that road when I have not a clue what you are
    >> really doing. I am not complaining about your use of tables. Go ahead
    >> and use tables. But you seem unwilling to give a URL that gives an
    >> idea of what you want, and you reject rowspan for some obscure reason.
    >>

    >
    > see not other solution than rowspan. didn't the that embedded table to
    > extend to full vertical extent.



    Glad *you* can see it.

    Can't understand why folks ask questions, but will refuse to supply a
    URL to what they are trying that fails, then dismiss all suggestions,
    and then still will refuse to supply more information, then will
    announce that they know the *only* solution which is known to be
    patently false by we who actually *know* that we are doing...whew!

    BTW to OP your really should update your SeaMonkey, 1.1.5 is ancient,
    numerous enhancements and security patched have been apply to current 2.0.2

    --
    Take care,

    Jonathan
    -------------------
    LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
    http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
     
    Jonathan N. Little, Feb 2, 2010
    #14
  15. Robert

    Roy A. Guest

    On 2 Feb, 16:11, "Jonathan N. Little" <> wrote:
    [...]
    > BTW to OP your really should update your SeaMonkey, 1.1.5 is ancient,
    > numerous enhancements and security patched have been apply to current 2.0.2


    When you test your web design I think you should not use the latest
    version of a browser. SeaMonkey might be better than Firefox, but we
    all know it's the same rendering engine.

    We all need a browser to use in regular life. Well, if you need a
    "working horse" that nobody cares about, SeaMonkey might be the
    choice.

    But if you're using SeaMonkey as your "working horse" you should not
    use the lates version of Firefox. I mean you should also test for
    previous versions of that rendering engine.
     
    Roy A., Feb 2, 2010
    #15
  16. Roy A. wrote:
    > On 2 Feb, 16:11, "Jonathan N. Little"<> wrote:
    > [...]
    >> BTW to OP your really should update your SeaMonkey, 1.1.5 is ancient,
    >> numerous enhancements and security patched have been apply to current 2.0.2

    >
    > When you test your web design I think you should not use the latest
    > version of a browser. SeaMonkey might be better than Firefox, but we
    > all know it's the same rendering engine.


    Ooookay, but what does that have to do with what I said? I was not
    talking about testing, I have NN4.61 for testing (I don't really bother
    any more, but never bother to uninstall) but I don't USE it for
    browsing|posting.

    SeaMonkey vs Firefox. Again this was not my point. Only his version is
    ancient, and there have been numerous security patches. You chould keep
    your browser up to date for security reasons. Unlike the
    OS-component-posing-as-a-web-browser, SeaMonkey is not tied to the OS
    and unless he is still running Win95 he can update.

    >
    > We all need a browser to use in regular life. Well, if you need a
    > "working horse" that nobody cares about, SeaMonkey might be the
    > choice.


    Huh? SeaMonkey happens to be my default browser. I just happen to like
    the "suite" over the standalones...

    >
    > But if you're using SeaMonkey as your "working horse" you should not
    > use the lates version of Firefox. I mean you should also test for
    > previous versions of that rendering engine.


    Firstly SeaMonkey lags Firefox. Mozilla doesn't support SeaMonkey
    anymore an independent team took up the role after Mozilla wanted to
    focus on Firefox|Thunderbird route. SeaMonkey team must wait for Firefox
    folks before they can incorporate them into SeaMonkey. Firefox 3.x has
    been out for some time now and it is only recently that SeaMonkey went
    from 1.1.18 (Firefox 2.x engine) to 2.x (Firefox 3.x engine). But again,
    what does this have to do with what I wrote, I wasn't talking about
    testing.

    --
    Take care,

    Jonathan
    -------------------
    LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
    http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
     
    Jonathan N. Little, Feb 2, 2010
    #16
  17. Robert

    Roy A. Guest

    On 2 Feb, 18:07, "Jonathan N. Little" <> wrote:
    > Roy A. wrote:
    > > On 2 Feb, 16:11, "Jonathan N. Little"<>  wrote:
    > > [...]
    > >> BTW to OP your really should update your SeaMonkey, 1.1.5 is ancient,
    > >> numerous enhancements and security patched have been apply to current 2.0.2

    >
    > > When you test your web design I think you should not use the latest
    > > version of a browser. SeaMonkey might be better than Firefox, but we
    > > all know it's the same rendering engine.

    >
    > Ooookay, but what does that have to do with what I said? I was not
    > talking about testing, I have NN4.61 for testing (I don't really bother
    > any more, but never bother to uninstall) but I don't USE it for
    > browsing|posting.
    >
    > SeaMonkey vs Firefox. Again this was not my point. Only his version is
    > ancient, and there have been numerous security patches.  You chould keep
    > your browser up to date for security reasons. Unlike the
    > OS-component-posing-as-a-web-browser, SeaMonkey is not tied to the OS
    > and unless he is still running Win95 he can update.
    >
    >
    >
    > > We all need a browser to use in regular life. Well, if you need a
    > > "working horse" that nobody cares about, SeaMonkey might be the
    > > choice.

    >
    > Huh? SeaMonkey happens to be my default browser. I just happen to like
    > the "suite" over the standalones...
    >
    >
    >
    > > But if you're using SeaMonkey as your "working horse" you should not
    > > use the lates version of Firefox. I mean you should also test for
    > > previous versions of that rendering engine.

    >
    > Firstly SeaMonkey lags Firefox. Mozilla doesn't support SeaMonkey
    > anymore an independent team took up the role after Mozilla wanted to
    > focus on Firefox|Thunderbird route. SeaMonkey team must wait for Firefox
    > folks before they can incorporate them into SeaMonkey. Firefox 3.x has
    > been out for some time now and it is only recently that SeaMonkey went
    > from 1.1.18 (Firefox 2.x engine) to 2.x (Firefox 3.x engine). But again,
    > what does this have to do with what I wrote, I wasn't talking about
    > testing.


    If you have to use SeaMonkey, well do it! But you should realize that
    Firefox and SeaMonkey (particularly) is Netscape Navigator in
    disguise.
     
    Roy A., Feb 2, 2010
    #17
  18. Roy A. wrote:
    > On 2 Feb, 18:07, "Jonathan N. Little"<> wrote:


    >> Firstly SeaMonkey lags Firefox. Mozilla doesn't support SeaMonkey
    >> anymore an independent team took up the role after Mozilla wanted to
    >> focus on Firefox|Thunderbird route. SeaMonkey team must wait for Firefox
    >> folks before they can incorporate them into SeaMonkey. Firefox 3.x has
    >> been out for some time now and it is only recently that SeaMonkey went
    >> from 1.1.18 (Firefox 2.x engine) to 2.x (Firefox 3.x engine). But again,
    >> what does this have to do with what I wrote, I wasn't talking about
    >> testing.

    >
    > If you have to use SeaMonkey, well do it! But you should realize that
    > Firefox and SeaMonkey (particularly) is Netscape Navigator in
    > disguise.


    What? There is no Netscape Navigator anymore. AOL finally dropped it.

    http://browser.netscape.com/history

    Anyway Firefox|SeaMonkey by Mozilla split company from Netscape when AOL
    took over. Yes all based on Gecko, but not sure what is your point. My
    point is that the OP should update what he was using for among other
    things security reasons. My SeaMonkey 2.0.2 is not the same codebase as
    the last Navigator NN9.x which is based on older engine using in SM1.x
    and FF2.x



    --
    Take care,

    Jonathan
    -------------------
    LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
    http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
     
    Jonathan N. Little, Feb 2, 2010
    #18
  19. Robert

    dorayme Guest

    In article
    <
    >,

    "Roy A." <> wrote:

    > If you have to use SeaMonkey, well do it! But you should realize that
    > Firefox and SeaMonkey (particularly) is Netscape Navigator in
    > disguise.


    I saw SeaMonkey (dressed as a fireman) trying to sneak in to this
    building the other day. "Hello, hello, hello", I ses to it, "Wot
    'ave we 'ere. 'Ave we a littl' monkey?"

    --
    dorayme
     
    dorayme, Feb 2, 2010
    #19
  20. Robert

    dorayme Guest

    In article <hk8t4a$kcm$>,
    Robert <> wrote:

    > dorayme wrote:
    > > In article <hk7fgu$g6c$>,
    > > Robert <> wrote:
    > >
    > >> how can make this vertical positionion "at the right bottom of a
    > >> certain area" with other means than tables? a simple example?

    > >
    > > Why should we go down that road when I have not a clue what you
    > > are really doing. I am not complaining about your use of tables.
    > > Go ahead and use tables. But you seem unwilling to give a URL
    > > that gives an idea of what you want, and you reject rowspan for
    > > some obscure reason.
    > >

    >
    > see not other solution than rowspan. didn't the that embedded
    > table to extend to full vertical extent.
    >
    > a google keyword hint or so regarding the other option(s) would be
    > enough. typically I find way upon that. no big road necessary.
    >
    >



    Not quite sure what you want. In case you are unsure how to do
    rowspan:

    <http://dorayme.netweaver.com.au/alt/rowspanForBob.html>

    --
    dorayme
     
    dorayme, Feb 2, 2010
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Goldy

    Repeater vertical spacing

    Goldy, Aug 24, 2005, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    4,502
    Karl Seguin
    Aug 26, 2005
  2. Replies:
    0
    Views:
    491
  3. Mark Parnell

    <h1> Spiders and vertical spacing

    Mark Parnell, Feb 11, 2005, in forum: HTML
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    1,800
    Scott_From_PA
    Feb 11, 2005
  4. quantass
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    1,183
    Patrick.O.Ige
    Jan 21, 2007
  5. K Viltersten

    Suspected vertical spacing of a DIV-element

    K Viltersten, May 30, 2008, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    331
    gerry
    Jun 3, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page